Monitoring resolution improves with study–test practice, with larger gains for backward than for forward pairs¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2006 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In Experiment 1, gamma-based resolution improved across presentations and was generally poorer when backward pairs were included in the analysis. → Koriat 2006

Evidence¶

Koriat 2006¶

Koriat, A., & Bjork, R. A. (2006). Illusions of competence during study can be remedied by manipulations that enhance learners' sensitivity to retrieval conditions at test. Memory & Cognition, 34(5), 959-972. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193244

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Experiment 1 gamma correlations over the first three presentations (analyses excluded participants with perfect recall); the presentation effect was significant, F(2,40) 13.12, p .0001, and "resolution improved with practice".

"First, resolution improved with practice, consistent with previously re- ported results (e.g., Begg et al., 1989; King et al., 1980; Koriat, 1997; Leonesio & Nelson, 1990; Lovelace, 1984). Second, resolution was generally poorer when the back- ward pairs were included in the analysis than when the for- ward pairs were included."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Test experience alleviates the foresight bias more effectively than study experience — related
• Resolution of JOLs increases across study–test cycles, improving between Cycles 1 and 2 but not from Cycle 2 to Cycle 3 — a broader claim this one bears on
• Repeated study–test practice reduces the foresight bias for backward pairs, with the illusion of competence disappearing by the fourth presentation — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The maze task included a re-solve phase in which participants solved the same maze forward or backward from finish to start